Re: The Privacy/Untraceability Sweet Spot
On Tuesday, August 28, 2001, at 8:04 AM, Tim May wrote:
On Monday, August 27, 2001, at 11:20 PM, Nomen Nescio wrote:
On Monday, August 27, 2001, at 12:56 PM, Tim May wrote:
On Monday, August 27, 2001, at 12:40 PM, Nomen Nescio wrote:
"Freedom fighters in communist-controlled regimes." How much money do they have? More importantly, how much are they willing and able to spend on anonymity/privacy/black-market technologies? These guys aren't rolling in dough.
The IRA and the Real IRA have a lot of money, as the Brits have been complaining about recently. Osama bin Laden is said to control more than a billion dollars. And so on. I disagree with you assertion that "these guys aren't rolling in dough."
Members of the IRA are not freedom fighters in a communist-controlled country. bin Laden did fall under that definition when he was fighting to get the Russians out of Afghanistan but that was a long time ago. Now he's opposing American influence in Saudi Arabia.
Your reading comprehension sucks. I gave half a dozen _examples_, one of them "freedom fighters in communist-controlled regimes" and you assume this is the only kind of freedom fighter being talked about. No point in carrying on a conversation with this breathtaking display of literalism.
The reason why "in communist-controlled regimes" is relevant is because you advanced it as an example of MORALLY acceptable use of technology (presuming that most readers will oppose communism). The objection was raised, yes, it is moral, but is it profitable? There are not many communist-opposed freedom fighters around today, not much money to be made there. You came back and mentioned the IRA and bin Laden. It is true, both of these are well funded. But this does not answer the objection. The point was, can you find groups that are both profitable to sell to, and morally acceptable? The latter consideration is what led to the "in communist-controlled regimes" limitation in the first place. You can't just throw that part out without losing the moral acceptability which motivated the example in the first place. bin Laden and the IRA have plenty of money, but will many cypherpunks agree with their politics? It's hard to believe that anyone thinks that if the IRA or bin Laden were to succeed in their goals, that they would put in place a kindler and gentler state. It remains a challenge to identify groups that are both (A) wealthy, (B) in need of anonymity technologies, and (C) morally acceptable to support. Freedom fighters don't fit all that well, in today's world.
It remains a challenge to identify groups that are both (A) wealthy, (B) in need of anonymity technologies, and (C) morally acceptable to support. Freedom fighters don't fit all that well, in today's world.
Jews, Christians, Muslims, Hutus, Tutsis, Vietnamese, Chinese, Russians, Commodities traders, Branch Davidians, homosexuals, hetrosexuals.... I could go on for pages but I'm telnetting. Some members of all of those groups have satisfied your somewhat arbitrary requirements at various times and in various places in the last 60 years. DCF ---- If you want to get rid of communists in government jobs; get rid of the government jobs. - Frank Chodorov.
On Tuesday, August 28, 2001, at 02:37 PM, Duncan Frissell wrote:
It remains a challenge to identify groups that are both (A) wealthy, (B) in need of anonymity technologies, and (C) morally acceptable to support. Freedom fighters don't fit all that well, in today's world.
Jews, Christians, Muslims, Hutus, Tutsis, Vietnamese, Chinese, Russians, Commodities traders, Branch Davidians, homosexuals, hetrosexuals....
I could go on for pages but I'm telnetting.
Some members of all of those groups have satisfied your somewhat arbitrary requirements at various times and in various places in the last 60 years.
I posted a list half a dozen years ago of "enemies of the people." Quakers, Mormons, homosexuals, Protestants, Catholics, and on and on...my CFP slide listed about a hundred. Search engines may turn it up. I would do the search myself, except I'm fed up with posting such information and not even having twits like Aimee Farr even read the oldest and most basic documents. (Her recent horrified reaction to very basic points is illustratative of her ignorance.) --Tim May
-- On 28 Aug 2001, at 23:00, Nomen Nescio wrote:
The objection was raised, yes, it is moral, but is it profitable? There are not many communist-opposed freedom fighters around today, not much money to be made there.
Most regimes on President Bush's shit list have an insurrection going against them. Most regimes with an insurrection going against them are on somebody's shit list. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG WtUFPNpsQLNxGP/qSqH2izBzHMq4ngVAAPohWVoX 4CIpMqIv/O63htMja6C1aD1cwbxzhNTB3Far6yVf8
participants (4)
-
Duncan Frissell -
jamesd＠echeque.com -
Nomen Nescio -
Tim May